Interfaith Partners for the Chesapeake Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463399793
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Annapolis, MD, USA
Phone
4106096852
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Affiliation
Interfaith

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,106,545
Expenses
$1,190,413
Assets
$674,367
Liabilities
$199,940

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MEENAL HARANKHEDKAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JODI ROSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TILL 3524)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEENAL HARANKHEDKAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $28,942 total reported compensation
  • JODI ROSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TILL 3524): $22,633 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ignite the power of faith communities in the chesapeake bay region to honor all of creation by working together to protect and restore our shared watershed.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs are delivered that are building networks/hubs of congregations that are working together to restore local watersheds through in-the-ground projects such as tree plantings and rain gardens, and educational programs to increase awareness among congregational members. Ipc also delivers programs that cultivate leaders within the congregations and increase their capacity to drive change at their institutions and surrounding community. These leadership development programs include train-the-trainer vacation bible school programs, grant-writing training, action-planning training and green team training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.7%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 65.5%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $55.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.6%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.7% of revenue deployed · 65.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 20 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $779K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $29K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.